4.6 Article

OATCR: Outdoor Autonomous Trash-Collecting Robot Design Using YOLOv4-Tiny

期刊

ELECTRONICS
卷 10, 期 18, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics10182292

关键词

Mask-RCNN; YOLOv4; YOLOv4-tiny; robot; trash; rocker bogie mechanism; machine learning; object detection; path-planning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper presents an innovative mechanical design for resilient Trash-Collecting Robots using the Rocker-bogie mechanism, alongside the exploration of various object detection models for trash detection. The Trash-Collecting Robot is fully autonomous, equipped with sensors and controlled by Raspberry Pi and Arduino for path-planning and motion. Among the models tested, YOLOv4-tiny was chosen for its optimal balance between mAP and detection time. The design was successfully simulated on different terrains, demonstrating expected behavior.
This paper proposed an innovative mechanical design using the Rocker-bogie mechanism for resilient Trash-Collecting Robots. Mask-RCNN, YOLOV4, and YOLOv4-tiny were experimented on and analyzed for trash detection. The Trash-Collecting Robot was developed to be completely autonomous as it was able to detect trash, move towards it, and pick it up while avoiding any obstacles along the way. Sensors including a camera, ultrasonic sensor, and GPS module played an imperative role in automation. The brain of the Robot, namely, Raspberry Pi and Arduino, processed the data from the sensors and performed path-planning and consequent motion of the robot through actuation of motors. Three models for object detection were tested for potential use in the robot: Mask-RCNN, YOLOv4, and YOLOv4-tiny. Mask-RCNN achieved an average precision (mAP) of over 83% and detection time (DT) of 3973.29 ms, YOLOv4 achieved 97.1% (mAP) and 32.76 DT, and YOLOv4-tiny achieved 95.2% and 5.21 ms DT. The YOLOv4-tiny was selected as it offered a very similar mAP to YOLOv4, but with a much lower DT. The design was simulated on different terrains and behaved as expected.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据